Battlefield 3 Xbox 360 review – dicey action

The PC version might be a technical tour de force but what about the console version? Do DICE have something to hide or is it just as good as its big brother?

Battlefield 3 (360) â as usual these screenshots are from the PC version

It’s developer DICE we feel sorry for. Every time we’ve met them they’ve seemed so obviously embarrassed by EA’s obnoxious approach to marketing Battlefield 3. ‘My goal is to create something that I see as a high quality shooter that I would like to play’, said Patrick Bach to us way back in April . As far as promoting the game and making increasingly hysterical comparisons to Call Of Duty are concerned he was adamant that, ‘that’s not my job’.

Whoever’s job it is at EA though has failed utterly. Not only have they made the company sound like a barracking bully with a Napoleon complex but they’ve created entirely the wrong expectation for Battlefield 3 in the minds of most gamers. Every time Battlefield 3 tries to mimic Call Of Duty it fails utterly, every time it is left to be it its own game it reminds you of why the series is lauded by PC gamers as one of the best multiplayer experiences of all time.Unusually for us we’ll do two separate reviews, one for consoles and one for the PC. Like the game itself most of this review will be the same as the PC, but the subtle differences are important ones.Tradition suggests that we should start our review with a look at the single-player, but that immediately does the game a disservice. Traditionally Battlefield games (Bad Company is a very distinct console-orientated spin-off) have never really had a single-player mode. There was always the option to play a facsimile of the multiplayer mode with computer-controlled opponents, but weak artificial intelligence made the experience useful only for learning the basic controls.Here though the approach is very different, with an instantly embarrassing attempt to copy the Call Of Duty formula, complete with an implausible sub-Tom Clancy style plot (and none of the humour of Bad Company), clockwork set pieces, linear progression down corridor-like levels, endless quick time events, tiny play areas, and virtually no artificial intelligence. In Infinity Ward and Treyarch hands none of these are negatives, and they’re cleverly used to manipulate the player and create an illusion of freedom and cinematic excess that is as exhilarating as it is knowingly silly.Like a good dumb action film there’s just as much skill needed to make a good Call Of Duty style game as there is a serious simulation or avant-garde indie game. DICE’s skills though lie in multiplayer and creating a well-balanced sanbox of guns and vehicles, as well as state-of-the-art visuals.Since it’s the graphics you’re probably worrying about the most here we’ll cut to the chase: they’re very good. We’ve no idea why EA has been so secretive about the console versions because with the HD texture patch applied (a process that takes minutes and less than 2GB of hard drive space) they really are some of the best on any console. Not the very best perhaps, as the PC version is on its format, but absolutely nothing to be upset about.Where the differences are more pronounced though are in areas such as the physics and artificial intelligence. These are notably worse than the PC and given the artificial intelligence was already poor that means this has some of the dumbest enemies we’ve ever seen in a big budget game. For example, your first proper encounter with the enemy is in a car park being assault by RPGs (we’re sure you’ve seen it in the trailers) and features an infinitely spawning number of bad guys jumping over a wall at you.The thing is they completely ignore you and go after your (completely invulnerable unless the script says so) team-mates instead. So we just stood by the car park entrance (which was completely open, negating the need to jump over walls in the first place) and mowed them down literally by the dozen. Not once did one of them even turn in our direction and the whole shambles of a set piece only ended when we finally decided to shoot the last RPG guy (as in rocket-propelled grenade, not Final Fantasy fan).To get back on a positive track though the multiplayer mode is, and always has been, the reason Battlefield exists. It’s ironic to note though that the Operation Metro map from the beta, which we were thoroughly sick of the sight of before even starting the finished game, is easily the worst of the nine on offer and thankfully the only one that tries to ape Call Of Duty.The other ones are ‘proper’ Battlefield maps – miles wide in size and yet skilfully designed to ensure that you won’t wander aimlessly looking for an opponent. The problem is though that the PC version allows for 64-player battles, and you only get a maximum of 24 here. That’s still a lot, but compared to the PC it makes the game feel much less like a sandbox and more like a traditional shooter.You still get the same vehicles, aircraft, weapons and equipment though, which allow you to try and play and things your own way. However, the more powerful vehicles, particularly the tanks, helicopters and jets take considerable skill to pilot so it’s frustrating that you can’t practice on them in anything but multiplayer – since the vast majority of the story campaign is solely on foot.But that’s one more reason why the multiplayer mode feels like an entirely different game, as you bump across country in a jeep, tear about the skies in a fighter or simply camp out undercover with a sniper rifle.Making proper strategic use of vehicles is one of the most important and distinctive elements of Battlefield 3, but the on foot combat is also cleverly nuanced. There’s a surprising mix of abilities too with the assault class dolling out health packs and the engineer and recon players able to make very different use of a range of modern day robots. There is a fairly traditional upgrade path for new equipment and specialisations, but it’s not of the same stifling importance as most modern shooters.Although Battlefield 3 does not utilise the squad commander concept from Battlefield 2 teamwork is still of primary importance. That means there’s almost no point playing if you end up with a bunch of trash-talking 12 year olds, which unfortunately on Xbox Live is not at all unlikely.One unexpected complaint is that while the visuals themselves are very good the console version of the Destruction 2.0 technology remains as underwhelming as on the PC. Due to the increased sturdiness of most of the buildings the scenery often seems to be less destructible than Bad Company 2, although still superior to most other games. The visuals also suffer from a fairly regular stream of bugs and glitches, with characters stuck inside vehicles or floating weirdly across the landscape.We’re also not at all convinced by Battlelog, which only ever seems to get in the way of setting up a game. It’s good that it’s free and for the stat-obsessed there are plenty of numbers to ogle at, but it seems designed far more as an aid to EA’s marketing department than it does the player.Sitting between the single-player and multiplayer experiences are the co-operative missions, which are an excellent new addition to the franchise. Unfortunately there’s only six of them though, and although fighting with a friend does help a lot the horribly unconvincing enemy artificial intelligence is just as bad as in the campaign mode.Overall, and particularly on consoles, it doesn’t really feel like this has moved on very much at all from Bad Company 2. The multiplayer is very good, but it’s not as distinctive as on the PC and has none of the same potential for fan-made mods. It’s also much more obvious that the game doesn’t really have any new ideas of its own. That’s not necessarily a problem, but the fact that it so incompetently tries to steal those of others is.

Go into the game knowing what to expect and this is one of the best shooters of the year so far, go in expecting a better-looking Call Of Duty and you’ll leave bitterly disappointed.In Short:An excellent multiplayer and the best version of Battlefield ever on a console, but a lesser game than on the PC and with a very poor single-player mode.Pros:Excellent graphics, large multiplayer maps and a superb range of different vehicles. Cleverly balanced gameplay and useful customisation features.Cons:Weak single-player campaign and only six co-operative missions. Destruction 2.0 is underwhelming and Battlelog an irritation. Lots of graphical glitches and terrible AI. Only 24-player multiplayer.Score:7/10Formats: Xbox 360 (reviewed), PlayStation 3 and PCPrice: £49.99Publisher: Electronic ArtsDeveloper: Digital Illusions CE (DICE)Release Date: 28th October 2011Age Rating: 16